By: BambaLaye Jallow

Leaders can stay in power by focusing on serving the people they lead rather than thinking of themselves as heroes, William George, a professor of management practice at Harvard Business School, has said. Power is a key concept in leadership and is generally defined as the propensity to influence others’ beliefs, attitudes and courses of action. With power comes the responsibility and accountability to others for a leader’s decisions and actions. While President Barrow can expand on his acquired position and power by putting the Gambians’ success before his own, he’s expected to constantly apply his leadership strengths and ideas toward the country’s better future. Let’s bear in mind that power comes in many forms and the essence of power seeks for the influence of a leader to motivate followers to respond or act in way that is acceptable.

However, power can bring out the best or worst in a leader. If President Barrow begins making foolish or selfish decisions that could hurt Gambia’s future, his grip on power can dissipate quickly. If he endeavors to exercise power judiciously, he will become the role model that influences meaningful development of the commonweal. Through strong communication, constant learning and the courage to pursue development opportunities, President Barrow can easily become the best leader Gambia has ever had. It is obvious to all that the bar is set low enough by his predecessor for him to achieve that accolade.

Yaya Jammeh was a perfect example of why an overinflated sense of power can lead to a false sense of control. A perception that made him become delusional at levels unseen or unheard of. This grand illusion or an overinflated sense of power can hurt leaders who may be inclined to take dangerous risks under the illusion, or delusion, that nothing can go wrong.

On the other hand, being frozen in a desire to please and be liked, or avoiding catastrophic errors in decision making could make President Barrow feel effectively powerless. Eventually, looking and acting as though he’s powerless is dangerous for his and Gambia’s future. If he does not act like he’s in charge, in effect he won’t be; and here are some of the counter intuitions he needs to avoid by all means, to stop the scenarios that seem to be playing out in his government as we speak:

Decision paralysis:

I am convinced that most well-meaning Gambians and friends, would like to see President Barrow nurture a cabinet that is empowered, and want to see him act more like a servant that facilitates decision-making, not control it. Notably, paralysis is a common and destructive form of decision abdication and one of the most important aspects of strong leadership is making and sticking with a decision. You can be wrong, but if you make a decision and then recant, you’re in trouble. If President Barrow is seen to be waffling around major decisions to be made because he is unable to make the call and see it through, his team will quickly learn this lack of clarity and work it to their advantage at the detriment of Gambia’s much needed development. I am not insinuating that his team will act unethically however, there must not be an opportunity for anyone to act unethically.

Too many opinions:

Ultimately President Barrow is the one who has to make decisions and live with the responsibilities or consequences. He must not be seen to be opening that job to others while getting too many heads involved. This ties back to my previous point on decision paralysis. Whilst engaging those whose responsibility covers a decision’s consequences is important, over-indulging too many players at the expense of effective action isn’t consensus-building, that’s ultimate abdication.

Accommodating everyone:

While he needs to have advisers around to help in his decision making process, President Barrow must not be seen to be saying ‘yes’ to everyone and not even those close to him as advisers. If he’s seen to be trying to accommodate everyone’s feeling of ownership and control, he’ll eventually lose his own control. The need to say ‘yes’ must not overpower the courage to say ‘no’ unless he wants to preside over a fragmented government that specializes in failure of strategies. A fragmented government is the last thing Gambia needs in these fragile times of nation rebuilding.

Tolerating poor performance:

Generally, people’s commitment to drive a strategy to fruition becomes diluted once they conclude that the plan or strategy is not being taken seriously, simply because the priorities change by the day. If President Barrow is seen to be waffling on decisions and priorities while doling out too much control over the direction of projects, he’ll find himself with no power to mandate what the country’s actual development exigencies are.

Finally, I would like to reflect a little on the how President Barrow’s cabinet could work best together. It is well known that all strong leadership teams or any strong team for that matter, must have the ability to collaborate and share power. When conflicts arise, they are expected collaborate, have meaningful dialogue and agree to disagree. A strong cabinet of leaders is expected to have the emotional intelligence, audacity and maturity to know that maintaining the balance of the power and portraying exemplary ethical behavior are the most efficient ways to effectively manage the affairs of a nation. Where disagreements arise and reach an impasse, they are expected to maturely handle it amongst themselves by agreeing to allow time for more information to be gathered or to defer the decision to some form of arbitration or a higher decision making authority. This is how power and teamwork are expected to be utilized. In the same vein, it is incumbent upon ourselves as citizens and friends that we call on our leaders to exercise the use of power responsibly.

With the enormous political capital accorded to him by virtue of Coalition 2016, President Barrow must not be seen to be waffling around with the powers and trust bestowed on him by the people of the beautiful nation of Gambia.

By Madi Jobarteh

Do Not Vote for APRC.

 
As we move towards the National Assembly elections on April 6, we will catalogue the series of crimes committed by APRC and its parliamentarians for Gambians to know that the greatest enemy of the Gambia was none other than the APRC led by Yaya Jammeh and APRC NAMs. Voting for APRC therefore means not only bringing back Dictatorship but also defending the rape, torture, enforced disappearance and killing of Gambians and the plunder of public wealth.

 
This is the party of torturers, rapists and killers of innocent Gambians and looters and plunderers of Gambia’s wealth. In its 22 years of Tyranny the most powerful base of Yaya Jammeh are his APRC National Assembly Members. They are the ones who butchered our constitution in every imaginable way just to make Yaya Jammeh a de facto brutal king over Gambians. These APRC NAMs condoned, defended, justified and supported each and every abuse of power and each and every crime committed by Yaya Jammeh and his thugs against innocent Gambians. How then can any Gambian return an APRC candidate back to our National Assembly?

 
Gambians must not forget the trauma and sense of insecurity inflicted on the people by Yaya Jammeh. Yaya Jammeh was a violent predator who practically and directly threatened each every Gambian, regardless of whether one was an APRC supporter or not. He had subjected every citizen to fear and indeed everyone was vulnerable and at risk of being arrested, dismissed, tortured and killed. Whether one was a civil servant or a security officer, a businessman or woman, a child or an imam or priest or just a private citizen, no one ever felt safe under Yaya Jammeh. Every Gambian was a potential victim. In that environment of insecurity, trauma and fear, it was the APRC NAMs who were the powerbase of the Regime of Yaya Jammeh, which they defended and entrenched.

 
These APRC NAMs defended Yaya Jammeh in a number of ways. Where they should speak up for the Gambia, they kept silent. Where they should stand up for the Gambia, they sat down. Where they should defend citizen rights, they allowed Yaya Jammeh to destroy them. Where they should protect our public wealth, they allowed Yaya Jammeh to plunder, as he liked. APRC NAMs deserve no place in our National Assembly. Ever.

We will catalogue their crimes against the Gambia.

God bless the Gambia.

By Haddijatou
Misandry.

After 22 years of dictatorial rule, Gambians will go to the polls once again in April, but this time to elect members of the National Assembly. Almost a year ago, a child marriage ban was passed by members of the National Assembly which seemed like a step towards progress and a dream come true. I was fortunate enough to attend an intergenerational meeting between Gambian children and the Gambia National Assembly in the days leading up to the ban and that might have been one of the angriest days of my life to date. As Gambians continue to hold conversations on politics and recognize their rights as citizens of this nation, it is important that we know who we elect into office and what their stances are on issues we hold most dear to us. Make sure that the people you are electing are willing to work for and with women and children to ensure that their rights are protected and that their liberation continues. Below is a piece I wrote on the day of the intergenerational meeting that could add insight to the importance of voting for the right representatives.

 
June 16th marked the official launching of the AU End Child Marriage Campaign in The Gambia. Throughout the month there have been activities pertaining to ending child marriage, and one of them happened to be an intergenerational meeting between Gambian children and the Gambia National Assembly. I had [what I initially thought was] the pleasure of attending that event, but was disappointed, to say the least. The event opened well with a testimony from a brave girl who is a child marriage survivor, and an introduction of the children, but that is as good as it got. The first question a girl asked pertained to what the National Assembly has done in terms in ending child marriage. To no one’s surprise, the answer was nothing. It would’ve been okay to stop there, but instead, certain members of the Assembly saw it fit to place the onus on children. They resorted to making silly statements and asking frivolous questions such as what kind of assurances the children would give about not getting pregnant, whether they were worthy of their “help” and if they would actually stay in school. Instead of carrying a constructive dialogue where the children and their concerns where listened to, members of the Assembly veered off topic and turned the meeting into a lecture on family honor, social media and teenage pregnancy.

 
The hypocrisy of the Gambian man has risen exponentially in the past few years, especially since women have demanded to be heard. Instead of engaging constructively, listening more, and being better partners in general, they decide it is much simpler to laugh, to discount misfortunes, or better yet act like whatever girls and women are going through doesn’t exist at all. It is hilarious that when it comes to teenage pregnancies, or out of wedlock pregnancies in general, the only person at fault will always be the girl. The National Assembly cheered when one of its members brought up social media and the use of ‘android’ phones (which supposedly expose your life and reduce your self-respect), as tools of pregnancy.

One of them joked about wanting a young wife (causing giggles and overall childishness). One of them also found it necessary to speak about changing attitudes brought on by android phones and never really explained his point and its relevancy to not getting pregnant. In our society, it doesn’t matter that it takes two to copulate, or that in most of the stories we hear the perpetrator is a much older man, it is always the fault of the girl. The ‘honor’ of an entire lineage rests between the legs of a girl, while a boy will never lose sleep over his promiscuity. How are you okay with telling a child that it is her responsibility to keep her family honor? Have we gotten so negligent with protecting our children that we’ve now turned them into gatekeepers of a hardship they have no business enduring?

It is shallow and irresponsible to assume that girls get pregnant on their own without once critically analyzing the conditions which make these pregnancies possible; a few of them include a lack of comprehensive sex education, poor quality of education in general, and a systematic poverty that heavily burdens girls and women. But yes, it is definitely the android phones and Instagram that belittle, rape, humiliate, and deny the girl child her rights. It is important to note that the National Assembly member who mentioned the supposed destruction of girls through android phones was a woman. The only two women present at the National Assembly (her and the deputy speaker) highlighted exactly why representation without the proper knowledge is harmful.

As detrimental as the hypocrisy of men is, nothing is more corrosive than internalized misogyny, especially from women in positions of power.
The deputy speaker mentioned her disappointment in girls and their school performances, because contrary to actual data, she believes that boys now outperform girls in school because of pregnancies due to only, and only, the girl’s behavior. If we really care about girls, their education, and their pregnancies so much, then what are the mechanisms in place to ensure that the girls who want to return to school after having a child can return? Why do we find it necessary to shame young mothers and convince them to carry the most demanding stigmas in our society? Where is the education and support that is necessary to prevent these girls from getting pregnant in the first place? But most importantly, what are we doing to prevent men from impregnating girl children in school? Again, this was not the place for these discussions, especially one with such infant depth.

 
When the Nationally Assembly finally came back to the topic of early marriage, the deputy speaker thought it wise and relevant to mention that girl children CHOSE to get married so early and FORCE their parents to marry them off, ‘employing tactics’ to make sure they succeed. This was said in front of two girls who had given testimonies of their forced marriages, one of who was smuggled to her husband, and the other whose mother had threatened to disown her. In the case of the girl who was smuggled, a National Assembly Member somehow found it necessary to cross-examine her and ask for silly details in the story, basically looking for a contradiction and something to disprove.

He tried to cast blame on the Department of Social Welfare without trying to listen to the work the department had done in order to get the girl home, this included arresting her grandfather until she was brought back and also alerting international agencies on her being trafficked. How intellectually limited and distasteful must one be to make comments based on little knowledge while addressing real life people who just told you that that is not the case. Our lawmakers don’t listen, they don’t care for the people they’re serving, they don’t care for their stories or their wellbeing. In fact, they don’t even know their own law, one of them asked about what age bracket defined childhood (which highlights even more how clueless and incompetent our public servants are).

They find it much easier to place blame on others than to hold themselves accountable. One of the biggest issues I found most disheartening was the labeling of intra-familial rape and sexual abuse as a new phenomenon. The Director of Social Welfare mentioned two current cases of girls being impregnated by their grandfathers, and the most coherent statements National Assembly Members could make was that these events only started to occur now. Somehow, it is only the new generation of adults raping their children, and that before us no uncle ever touched their niece and no grandfather ever impregnated their grandchild. We continue to limit safe spaces for survivors and bury in them self-blame that will take generations to unlearn. We make statements that have no foundation that basically float on arrogance and belittlement.

 
We are failing ourselves, we our failing our children, and we are failing everything the forefathers and mothers of our beloved nation once fought for. We’re still living in a time where men can make ant-hilled decisions on the wellbeing of girls and women and have it lauded as progress. Reelection will continue to be more important to politicians than having meaningful careers changing the lives of the people they supposedly serve. The Director of Social Welfare mentioned a very important point, if politicians really cared about the constituents they serve; they would knock on each door during reelection campaigns and talk to them about important issues such as child marriage and ways to protect children within their communities. But no, because they don’t care, it is much easier to believe that the people they serve are just as unwilling to want better for themselves.

 
At the end of the event, the children and National Assembly Members then came together for a group photo to mark what would seemingly look like a successful dialogue in the eyes of anyone who hadn’t attended. Standing outside waiting for a ride home was perhaps when a colleague and I were really able to internalize the cluster of mishaps we had just witnessed. To see the National Assembly Members drive out in their nice cars, with their tinted windows rolled up, pockets filled with incentives to continue upon their mediocrity, and to hear their laughter coupled with an inflated sense of accomplishment, I can only hope that the children who were present at the dialogue become the kind of leaders we deserve, who do what needs to be done instead of finding loopholes to accountability while being rewarded for it.